JohnE wrote:

>Post the version for 4.x users, put a nice little (unsupported) next to it and call it a day.

I am perplexed at your suggestion. OK, to avoid liability or obligation
for a product to work once compiled sources are released, the vendor can
just say "unsupported"? In that case, you could just compile your own,
since you don't care about bug fixing. You are upset by having to
compile your own? (BTW, I really doubt this idea would legally fly.)


It seems to me that getting it to compile is relatively small potatoes.
The weird bugs that might appear due to changes by Borland/Codegear in
the related VCL source would for me be a bigger issue.



Dave M

JohnE wrote:
> SQL Server Express is free.  You can't get much cheaper than that.  That's
> why I think it's nuts for Tim to try and compete with that.  The Elevate
> value proposition is waning, imo.

Well it might be for you. Can't disagree with that. The problem with
every database system I have examined is that it has serious drawbacks,
depending on the scenario. This is a comparison of apples to oranges.
Different uses would indicate the use of a different product.

As an example, for a web based db server I would not even consider SQL
Server Express. It might very quickly turn into an expensive proposition.


Dave M

JohnE

>Yeah, and it's, um, horse crap. Post the version for 4.x users, put a nice
>little (unsupported) next to it and call it a day.

And the next stage is users like yourself will be demanding support for the product because its obviously current, or refusing to buy it because its unsupported.

Roy Lambert

JohnE

>1. Which Microsoft products? OS? You can't compare OS to this.

Why not - its software.

Roy Lambert

JohnE


I've just thought of a very intriguing question. Why are you upgrading to D2007?

Roy Lambert

Roy Lambert wrote:
>
> And the next stage is users like yourself will be demanding support for the product because its obviously current, or refusing to buy it because its unsupported.
>
> Roy Lambert
>

And they might be right in expecting support.

ISTM that using any unsupported 3rd party software database is not a
good idea. I still use some Orpheus components, but I have either fixed
or worked around the bugs. As I don't used embedded (client server
only), any small Orpheus bugs are probably not going to bring down the
server and do substantial corruption. Trying to fix bugs in DBISAM is
way beyond what I would be interested in.

Dave


Sensible at least I don't buy the source cos if Tim was hit by the bus there'd be no way I could maintain it.

Roy Lambert

>I use 3.26.  I can't compile it, so I'm moving to 4.x, which will be my last
>DBISAM version.  

John, why won't it compile?  If you need help getting packages built
for D2007, I would be happy to post the few changes I made to get it
working and installed.  Mind you that I have not completely and fully
tested the changes but I have put the code through some test and so
far I have not had any problems show their ugly face.

I think it took me like ten minutes tops to get version 3.x compiled
and installed in 2007.  

So now you might ask, "Well if it took so little time, then why can't
Tim do it?"  A fair question but one that he has already answered.  He
is no longer able to support version 3 while maintaining and
supporting version 4 at the same time he develops EDB.   He does not
have the staff of MS nor the bank account balances they have.  (If he
did, them I doubt Elevate would be around much longer - Tim would
probably be off fishing or skiing somewhere).

The moral to the story is that these newsgroups are here for the
community to both render aid and to receive it when needed.  I
maintain a software package that I have no intentions of migrating to
version 4 or even EDB any time soon.  So, I am forced either leave D7,
DBISAM version 3 and all the other components installed or migrate to
D2007.  I chose the latter which meant that I was required to port
DBISAM to work in D2007 - done!  I'll be happy to help if you need.

- Bill

Hello Dave,

> Is there an official policy to make things clear? (Like no new builds
> for old versions.) It's hard to tell a customer no, but sometimes you
> have to.  When that happens, it seems to me that it is important that
> they "feel" treated fairly and consistently.

I don't understand you ... All the products have expiration date,
why not DBISAM ? ... If you want to use Delphi 2007 you should
upgrade your components too ...

--
Charalabos Michael - [Creation Power] - http://www.creationpower.gr

Charalabos Michael wrote:

> All the products have expiration date, why not DBISAM ?

My suggestion was that maybe it would be a good idea to make it explicit
(meaning for any vendor, not just Elevate).

>If you want to use Delphi 2007 you should upgrade your components too

That's the way it is in the Delphi environment, and that's what I soon
came to understand after using Delphi, but maybe not everyone knows this?

I think most professionals and especially developers who are selling
developer tools wouldn't even question the need to "move on", and would
find the insistence for continuing builds to be unreasonable. But
hobbyists or part timers might not understand. In fact, that insistence
most probably indicates that someone is a hobbyist on a limited budget.

I have never asked for zero cost continuing builds from any vendor.
Besides being long and drawn out this thread has caused me to think
about the issues involved. I can appreciate why a vendor discontinues
builds. I can appreciate that that there may not be any other reasonable
alternative.


Dave M